Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Sea Level Rise Already Causing Billions in Home Value To Disappear (axios.com)

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the impact-analysis dept.

Sea level rise may seem like a far-off threat, but a growing number of new studies, including one out this week, shows that real estate markets have already started responding to increased flooding risks by reducing prices of vulnerable homes. From a report: According to a new report by the nonprofit First Street Foundation, housing values in New York, New Jersey and Connecticut dropped $6.7 billion from 2005 to 2017 due to flooding related to sea level rise. Combined with their prior analysis of 5 southeastern coastal states with $7.4 billion in lost home value, the total loss in 8 states since 2005 has been $14.1 billion. A recent slew of studies show how the housing market is responding to the increasing risk of coastal flooding -- with billions in value disappearing as investors wake up to the systemic risk.

13 of 280 comments (clear)

  1. Not from sea level rise by 110010001000 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Coastal homes are flooding because you have destroyed the buffer zones (marshlands/swamplands) that stopped the water from entering the area. What did you think would happen when you destroy the buffer zones for housing? It has nothing to do with climate change/whatever. But no one wants to address that issue, because there is no money in it.

    1. Re:Not from sea level rise by 110010001000 · · Score: 5, Informative

      Not necessarily stupid: just misled by developers and into homes that are relatively cheap. Some people would assume that it would be illegal to build homes on floodplains and the government would be looking out for their interests. As usual, the government didn't care. Developers bought the flood plain lands because they were cheap and put housing on it. Fortunately the government has finally started to wise up to the concept that allowing homes to be built on lands that have been flooding for hundreds of years might not be a good idea.

  2. slashdot at its worst by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Climate change is yet another of those topics that brings out the worst in this "community". Morons either outright denying the reality of CC and its horrific impacts, or other morons trying to prove how smart they are by saying things like, "The real problem isn't sea level rise its the destruction of marshes."

    This place could be so much more than it is, if it weren't for the mental masturbators who can't simply accept the view of the overwhelming number of experts in a field.

    1. Re:slashdot at its worst by riverat1 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Florida was supposed to be underwater by the 90s, and last time I checked it is still there.

      Show me any oceanographer with scientific credentials who ever said that. You're paying attention to the wrong people if you think that was an actual prediction.

    2. Re:slashdot at its worst by riverat1 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      There have been cases in science where 40,000 papers by experts had to be considered questionable. It is possible for a large number of experts to be wrong.

      What you always fail to mention in noting this factoid is that the vast majority of them are in the medical or social sciences field. When you get into the physical sciences the number of retractions is far smaller. I think that is a distinction worth making.

  3. Problem for rich people by reanjr · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Primarily rich people and real estate investors wild be hit, while the middde class homes a bit farther inland will increase in value. Win/win.

  4. They were overvalued. by Fly+Swatter · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Common sense says don't build on a flood plain. Oh and stop destroying marshlands and wetlands that protect from flooding in the first place.

  5. national flood insurance by ooloorie · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They're not responding to sea level rise, they are responding to the expiration of the federal flood insurance program.

    As long as the federal flood insurance program was in place, people whose houses got flooded simply could rebuild a shiny new house at taxpayer expense again and again.

    As for sea level rise, it is happening and going to continue at roughly the same rate for a couple of centuries at least, no matter what we do, so that can't be the cause of sudden changes in coastal real estate prices. Whatever the threat may or may not be, it has been priced in for years.

    Furthermore, homes depreciate over about 30 years, so anything beyond that horizon is not worth worrying about.

    1. Re:national flood insurance by ooloorie · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Unfortunately climate change does not work "gradually over hundreds of years".

      We're talking about sea level rise, not climate change. Sea level rise necessarily is slow and gradual.

      We in NY/NJ getting hit with hurricanes the likes of which we have not been seen before. Prime real estate at ocean front either got swept away and what is left of it lost all value. Even in my far from ocean town the houses close to river cannot be sold any longer.

      The only reason "ocean front real estate" is "prime" is because of massive government subsidies. Prior to those, people avoided the ocean front because they would be regularly subject to storms and other natural disasters.

      It's interesting what straws you people grasp at to justify your crony capitalism.

  6. Re: Yes, but other property is increasing in value by BoogieChile · · Score: 5, Informative

    This house here? the one that's three kilometres inland and 150 METRES above sea level?

    Hmm...I wonder what he thinks is going to happen...

  7. Re:Yes, but other property is increasing in value. by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Because the highest mountain is only 160 ft above sea level ?

    *squint*

    Because Hollywood people know shit about geography. Yet we trust them to inform us on the fine points of nuclear physics.

  8. Re:Yes, but other property is increasing in value. by riverat1 · · Score: 5, Informative

    If every bit of land-based ice melted, the oceans would rise about 160 ft.

    I think that number is only for all of Antarctica. The number I've seen most often and what I got when I calculated it myself is more like 210 feet.

    Greenland has about 2,850,000 cubic kilometers of ice. Antarctica has about 26,500,000 cubic kilometers of ice. I'm going to ignore the rest of the ice because it's practically at rounding error levels. So the two of them together add up to 29,350,000 km^3 of ice. The surface area of the worlds oceans is about 361,000,000 km^2.

    So 29,350,000 km^3 divided by 360,000,000 km^2 equals 0.081527 km or about 267 feet. Of course the ocean spreads out as it rises so you have to take that into account so that's how they get 210 feet.

    Also that doesn't take into account sea level rise from thermal expansion. That is currently causing about 1/3 of the sea level rise we see.

  9. Re:By The Same Token by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Unless you're a native American, you have ZERO RIGHT to say SHIT about immigrants, because one way or another YOUR ancestors were immigrants.

    Since the "native Americans" came here from Siberia 20K or so years back (except the Eskimos, who came here much more recently), that would imply that there are NO "native Americans', since their ancestors were also immigrants.

    --

    "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"